Torts
LAW 223 · 4 units · Autumn Quarter
Tort law addresses civil wrongs—injuries to person, property, or reputation for which the law provides a remedy, typically monetary damages. This course examines the doctrines governing liability for unintentional and intentional wrongdoing, strict liability without fault, and the measure of damages. Students study how tort law defines standards of conduct, allocates risk, deters future wrongdoing, and compensates those injured by the wrongful conduct of others.
The course begins with intentional torts—battery, assault, false imprisonment, trespass, conversion, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Students then examine negligence, the most important and frequently encountered tort doctrine, studying duty, breach, causation, and damages. The course explores liability without fault through strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities, liability for defective products, and workers' compensation. Finally, students address defenses, comparative fault, and the damages available for various injuries.
Tort law provides the foundation for understanding personal injury litigation, product liability, medical malpractice, and the balance between victim compensation and defendant accountability that pervades civil justice.
Learning Objectives
- Understand and apply the elements of intentional torts: battery, assault, false imprisonment, trespass to land, trespass to chattels, conversion, and intentional infliction of emotional distress
- Master the negligence framework: duty, breach (reasonable person standard), causation (both actual and proximate), and damages
- Analyze foreseeability and proximate causation limitations on negligence liability
- Understand strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities and defective products
- Apply comparative fault and assumption of risk doctrines
- Calculate compensatory damages for personal injury, including economic and non-economic damages
- Evaluate product liability under warranty, negligence, and strict liability theories
Required Casebook
Torts: Cases and Materials (12th ed., Dobbs, Haynes & Benton, 2019) — West Academic. This comprehensive casebook covers intentional torts, negligence, and strict liability with careful attention to doctrine development, modern applications, and statutory alternatives to common law tort rules.
Lecture Topics
Week 1: Introduction to Tort Law
Goals of tort law: compensation, deterrence, and justice. Comparison with contract law and criminal law. Damages as the primary remedy.
Week 2: Intentional Torts—Battery and Assault
Battery: intent and harmful or offensive contact. Assault: apprehension of imminent contact. Intent to harm vs. intent to contact. Self-defense and defense of others.
Week 3: Other Intentional Torts
False imprisonment, trespass to land, trespass to chattels, conversion. Intent requirements and defenses including privilege and consent.
Week 4: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
Extreme and outrageous conduct, severe emotional distress, causation. High threshold and limited duty to avoid non-contact harm.
Week 5: Negligence—Duty and Breach
Duty of care, standard of care (reasonable person), foreseeable plaintiff and harm, special duties, and breach through failure to conform to standard.
Week 6: Causation
Actual causation (but-for test), substantial factor test, and proximate causation (legal causation), including intervening causes and foreseeability.
Week 7: Defenses to Negligence
Assumption of risk, comparative fault, and contributory negligence. Pure and modified comparative negligence rules by jurisdiction.
Week 8: Damages in Tort
Compensatory damages: economic (medical expenses, lost wages) and non-economic (pain and suffering). Punitive damages for intentional and reckless conduct.
Week 9: Strict Liability
Strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities, animals, and defective products. Products liability under strict liability, warranty, and negligence theories.
Week 10: Defective Products—Manufacturing and Design
Manufacturing defects, design defects (consumer expectations vs. risk-benefit), warnings and instructions. Restatement (Third) §2 approach to product liability.
Week 11: Vicarious Liability and Joint Liability
Respondeat superior and employer liability, independent contractor distinction, joint and several liability, contribution, and indemnity.
Landmark Cases
Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. (1928)
Foundational proximate causation case. The court held that negligence liability extends only to those within the foreseeable zone of danger. Plaintiff was injured by a delayed chain of events caused by defendant's negligence toward another passenger. Established foreseeability as the limit of liability.
Rylands v. Fletcher (1865)
Classic strict liability case: non-natural use of land that allows dangerous things to escape results in liability without negligence. Though modified in modern law, remains important for strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities.
Winterbottom v. Wright (1842)
Early products case establishing privity requirement: manufacturer not liable to remote purchasers for defects. This barrier was eventually overcome, leading to modern strict products liability.
MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. (1916)
Landmark case eliminating the privity requirement for negligent manufacture. Established that manufacturers owe a duty of care to foreseeable users, not just immediate purchasers, revolutionizing products liability.
Hammonds v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. (1963)
Recognizes invasion of privacy as a tort. Establishes that unwanted intrusion upon another's solitude or seclusion is actionable, protecting against electronic surveillance and unreasonable searches.
Study Guide
Tort Cause of Action Framework
Tort analysis requires careful identification of which tort is allegedly committed and systematic analysis of the required elements:
Intentional Torts Analysis
For intentional torts, demonstrate each element with the specific facts:
- Intent: Does the defendant intend the harmful/offensive contact or know with substantial certainty it will occur?
- Conduct: Did the defendant act in a way that caused the alleged harm?
- Causation: Did the defendant's conduct cause the injury?
- Damages: Did the plaintiff suffer injury?
Negligence Analysis (FOUR Elements)
- Duty: Did the defendant owe a duty of care to the plaintiff? Is the plaintiff foreseeable? Are there special duties?
- Breach: Did the defendant fail to exercise the standard of care required? Use the reasonable person standard—what would a reasonable person do in the defendant's circumstances?
- Causation:
- Actual Cause (But-For): Would the harm have occurred but for the defendant's conduct?
- Proximate Cause: Is the harm within the foreseeable scope of risk created by the defendant's breach? Consider intervening causes and foreseeability.
- Damages: Did the plaintiff suffer compensable injury?
The Reasonable Person Standard
The reasonable person standard is the objective baseline for breach. Consider the defendant's situation, not their subjective beliefs. However, the reasonable person takes into account:
- The risks and benefits involved
- Common practice (though not necessarily determinative)
- The cost of avoiding the risk
- The seriousness of the potential harm
Causation Issues
Actual Cause: Generally requires but-for causation. Would the injury have occurred without the defendant's wrongdoing? In multiple tortfeasor cases, use the substantial factor test.
Proximate Cause: Limits liability for remote consequences. Ask: Was the type of harm foreseeable? Was the manner of occurrence foreseeable? Intervening causes may break the causal chain if they were unforeseeable.
Strict Liability
Strict liability removes the requirement of negligence and intent. The defendant is liable merely by engaging in the prohibited conduct and causing injury:
- Abnormally dangerous activities
- Animals (with some exceptions for domestic animals)
- Defective products (if the product is defective and causes injury)
Defenses
- Assumption of Risk: Plaintiff knew of the risk and accepted it, or plaintiff's conduct amounted to consent
- Comparative Fault: Plaintiff's own negligence reduces damages. Pure comparative negligence: compare fault percentages. Modified: defendant only liable if more than 50% at fault.
- Privilege: Defendant's conduct was justified or protected by law (e.g., self-defense, defense of property)
Damages Calculation
- Economic Damages: Medical expenses, lost wages, rehabilitation costs (calculable from bills and documents)
- Non-Economic Damages: Pain and suffering, emotional distress, loss of consortium (requires judgment)
- Punitive Damages: Available for intentional and reckless conduct; calculated as multiple of actual damages or fixed amount
Exam Strategy
- Identify the tort(s) alleged and work through elements systematically
- Recognize factual disputes on breach and causation—argue both sides
- Be precise about foreseeability and causation—these are frequent close calls
- Don't forget defenses; they can be dispositive
- Calculate damages separately for economic and non-economic components
- Consider products liability issues if products are involved; apply Restatement §2
Practice Questions
MBE-style multiple choice and essay questions covering intentional torts, negligence, causation, defenses, and strict liability. Work through scenario-based problems testing your ability to identify issues and apply tort principles.
Additional Resources
- Restatement (Second) of Torts — Primary authority on tort doctrines; particularly §§1-46 (intentional torts), §281-298 (negligence).
- Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability §2 — Modern products liability framework; defines design and warning defects.
- Negligence Checklist — Use a systematic checklist to ensure you cover all four elements of negligence in every analysis.
- Foreseeability Examples — Review cases establishing what is foreseeable and what breaks the proximate causation chain.
- Damages Worksheets — Practice calculating economic and non-economic damages from fact patterns.
- Comparative Negligence by Jurisdiction — Understand your state's rule: pure comparative negligence, modified, or bar rule.
- Products Liability Diagram — Visual guide distinguishing manufacturing defects, design defects, and warning defects.
Flashcards
Master tort terminology: Battery, Assault, Duty of care, Reasonable person, Breach, Actual causation, Proximate causation, Foreseeability, Strict liability, Products liability, Punitive damages. Spaced repetition ensures retention of elements and standards for all major torts.